Who's to blame for Islamaphobia?

I'm not form UK and I live in an area with predominant Muslim population. I've been born & brought up in this neighbourhood, however never have seen so many Burkha clad women & men wearing their prayer caps outside the Mosque earlier sporting full beard. I mean this has drastically gone up in the last few years. At times I feel intimidated by this change in behaviour. Is this warranted in a Secular Society / State which was not so earlier?

This looks strange as the world is progressing & don't know, some may be going the other way round, in spite of studying in missionary English medium schools. I feel that fanaticism & religious zealots are on the rise. This is bound to get some reaction from other religions which I feel is he case in UK. I watch BBC regularly CNN occasionaly & can see more of young men & women in Burkha / Hijad on the streets of other countries too.
If one group tries to highlight religion in a secular society there is bound to be repercussion. Nationality should come first rather than religion, which should always be a private affair in modern society.
People need to think deep & decide or else I'm afraid there is bound to be a clash in society or country. One needs to blend with the Culture & Ethos of the country where he / she lives. Or else seclusion will only be encouraged.
Time for all of us to ponder, decide & then act accordingly.

I watched Mike Sergeant speaking to Baroness Warsi, it's interesting. However, I feel how these politicians in UK as well as India, where I'm from are so far from reality. They do not realise the ground situation & start speaking without a 360 degree view of things. This may be a malady we need to rectify fast or else there'll we problems for all in a multi ethnic / multi cultural / multi religious society.
I genuinely feel that BBC is doing a very good work in this sphere. More so with the Doha debates & such programmes. Watching at least 20 plus news channels international, nationals in English, Hindi & Bengali I feel BBC is one channel that stands way ahead.
So BBC has an onerous task of bridging this 'Great Religious Divide' we it seems are going to face, in the very near future. Time for all saner elements & liberals of all religions to do their bit & improve this difficult but very much bridgeable divide.

This is NOT prejudice but what Muslims have created for themselves. Of course there is a backlash against Muslims who profess moderation, whatever that is, but practice Sharia Law, and refuse to assimilate and contribute to the society to which they immigrated.
I think people are fed up having to swallow hard and accept a 7th century lifestyle foisted upon them along with 7th century belief's incapable of being relevant to modern society.
Lastly I have to ask the question of how can radical Muslims exist unless they have the tacit support of "moderate" Muslims.
Muslims have created a mess for themselves.

It is very clear how Muslims are prejudiced against in UK and elsewhere in America.But the question to ask here is why so?
I don't think this is an action against the islam religion but rather against those who practise it particularly the white Muslims who have had some of their mates terrorising some communities both of thei own and of others.
Here in Ghana and other African countries,we have highly rated and well respected Muslims who occupy high ranked positions and so much respected.Think of the immediate past vice president of Ghana Alhaji Aliu Mahama,the late Nigerian President Umar Y'radua to name but a few.
These Muslims are accepted where ever they go and are not prejudiced against.
I think white Muslims particularly the Arabs must try to change their attitude and life style to fit into all societies and become useful both to themselves and to others.

Given in europe you have politicians referring to Israel as "that sh*$ty little country" you have unions left and right boycotting Israeli products and Israeli academics (who ironically are usually always left wing), people constantly saying Israel is the greatest threat to world peace, if these statements about Islamophobia are in fact true, muslims have caught up to the treatment of Jews.

I know moderates do speak out against islamist terror attacks, and there have been plenty of islamists terrorist attacks in the UK in recent years, and attempts, and so in the US too, but whenever there is talk of islamophobia, the reaction and the loudness of the complains is much louder than say the reaction to the daily violence in the Muslim world. Yesterday, 50 people were blown up in Iraq because they were members of teh wrong sect. It seems muslims have their own, much bigger islamophobia problem. You might get some words in the UK about muslims, but you don't have violence against Muslims.

Why is the outrage always much louder against alleged islamophobia, and cartoons than the daily carnage in the muslim world? Muslims kill each other on a daily basis, and yet the only claims of Islamophobia I hear about are calls from Muslims in the west about how hateful and intolerant the west is. look in the mirror first, and ask why Sunnis and shiites have been hating and killing each other for many years, then ask who is the most islamophobic.

Another example of Islamophobia amongst Muslims, besides the violence in the Muslim world, ties into another show WHYS did about the movie, The Infidel. In that, after the main character admits he was born Jewish in front of a crowd, he is confronted by his very upset family, and he says, "well, at least I'm not a Shia". And there were many other jabs at the conflict between sunnis and shia. Let's not forget that Islam is not without its major problems, and quite honestly, any hostility from non muslims towards muslims pales between the hostility, fear and hatres sunnis and shiites have for each other, let alone the smaller sects like the Sufis, Ahmadis, etc who sunnis and shiites don't consider to be real Muslims and consider them to be heretics.

Wrong to divide them into extremist and moderate muslims? yes of course, there exist only the fundamentalist extremists and those that agree with them, some willingly, some not so willingly. where are the moderates? In this case moderate does not mean mere refraining from extreme idealogy, but being able to criticize their own community. Criticizing the community for its willingness to aggressively impose their medieval view of the world on the rest of the world.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

She is so unconvincing when she says that the media carries out a superficial debate about this issue. The fact is, her community is incapable of true, deep introspection. any argument they start seems to start with the assumption tht they can do no wrong.

The fact that there are a large number of muslims living a normal, benign life (and tht is a fact) does not change the situation.Islam has a mechanism by which it always maintains at least a small reservoir of its radical form.This allows the resurgence of the radical form sooner or later.

I recognise that there are Muslims that want to create a different form of Islam (and will therefore not automatically condemn every Muslim I meet), but they are few in number and I've heard the word "moderate" being applied to extremist countries, groups and people just a bit too often. It seems like there is a double standard: a Muslim who is non-violent is called moderate, anyone from another religion or political ideology is only called moderate when they don't want to take freedoms away from other people, don't discriminate and are contend to keep their ideas a personal matter. Malaysia is not a moderate country, neither is Egypt or Indonesia, too many people have been imprisoned after conversion for this lie to hold up.

I grew up with spirituality but never linked it to any religion. The first time I realized which religion I belonged to was when I travelled to a Muslim country. This was one of the 1st things they ask as they try and slot you. I have lived in countries dominated by Muslims and enough of them tried to convert me and inadvertently told me that I needed to see the light, as the only way forward was theirs. My child in 1st grade had muslim kids gang up against her and tell her that she was not good because she was not a Muslim. She came home asking me what they meant as she did not understand religion. I've heard and seen kids argue and fight amongst each other over which God is superior..Allah or Jesus...this in a country dominated by Muslims. Something must be wrong there. Are the teachings and values which are being imparted in the name of religion intolerant, prejudicial and therefore encouraging hatred? If so I think as a community the Muslims need to introspect and try and understand why non muslims hold a certain view of them. Any Religion is defined by it's practitioners.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

The answer must be quite obvious to all non-Muslims. It is Islam itself, which has the ambition of taking over world control, just as nationalists and communists would like to.
Were Islamists content to live alongside people of other religions, without forcing their way of life into the foreground, there would be no reason for fear.
Our politicians are however also to blame. For years they have being turning a blind eye to the dangers of aggressive religions. Freedom of religion only makes sense, when the rights of others are respected. With Islam this is not the case, even divisions within this religion are very often accompanied by violence and hatred. This is something we have reason to fear and do not need in Europe.

She says faith is not a matter that can be debated. When our faith causes us to act in a way that affects others, it certainly is a legitimate matter of debate. When faith causes us to advocate violent actions, it becomes mattter of public debate and censure automatically.

Privately held faith, deep as it may be, will be respected accordingly. The world no longer punishes people for holding a faith - thankfully. It was a long journey to reach there, and we are going to stay there, even if it offends the baroness. If she at all intends to have a deeper look, she must talk to her community about not wanting to kill people when they change their faith. Tht would be a logical conclusion of her statement that faith is above discussion.

People are instinctively afraid of anything and anyone new that they don't understand. There is a growing conservatism in the world that doesn't want change and feels insecure in the company of foreign cultures; the result is intolerance. Politicians and Media play a siginificant role in promoting negative stereotypes and normalising prejudices to suit their own agendas which include demonisation and inciting violence.
Intolerance (including Islamophobia) is not compatible with British values. It is important to stress that prejudice and hatred does not strengthen British society or British identity, it only weakens it and makes it less humane.
Britain has minority rights that must be maintained, the laws against inciting hatred must be implemented, and politicians with their media be more responsible and accountable for the direction of their followers.

For the intellectuals to achieve the high graded aim the subject matter most not be left far away while islamaphobia has been the curning side of some long anti-islam who marginalise every action which seen to be perpetrated by a muslim or a group of muslim who lacks the context of islam in his life while other innocent muslims will be purnished by the people who think they exercise justice and fairness in human right. Also the west midea is not doing fine in this regard.

I think that Islamophobia has been created by two parties: Muslims and the West. The Islamic is being still now by the most brutal regimes in the world, former Tunisian regime is the striking example. Moreover the Muslims themselves did not do what is needed to stop killers within the Islamic communities. As for the West, we had all already known that these brutal regimes cannot survive even one single day the help of the West, we have seen the French government has done everything to save Ben Ali and his regime! I think it is time now to stop this stupidity and work together for the benefit of the Humankind.

I have had to look at this issues and always end up with confusion. Firstly, it does not appear easy to tell why westerners are targeted by radical Muslims and I mean radical in the real sense because its not true that every Muslim hates westerners. They never make themselves easily understood in the way they choose their targets. And surely who are these Muslims other than those in the west mainly? These to me are the ones that radicalize the others. The source of radicalism might not be religion either. Are they anti Christians? This is a very unlikely thing judging from patterns of attack that we witness.
Having said that, its not hard to conclude that there must be a veneer of hypocrisy from these two protagonists. What ails the Muslims in general? There is none better to enlighten on this than the westerners themselves. They must know and the Muslims themselves must also tell us.
It runs like this - Muslim = Arab. White = Jew and so on. But what about the British White Muslims? Or if you like the Arab Christian? Its all very interesting but at the same time its all hypocritical.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Good question!

Let's be honest; for histories, radical Islamic Muslims, in support of their Quran beliefs, have been at war with all Judeo-Christians around the world. The battles continue today with disputes of western/secular Constitutional freedoms v. the Quran and Sharia Law. In expanding and intense battles, Islamic Muslims are pressing their beliefs upon Britain (only 3% Islamic), Constitutional freedoms, and Judeo-Christian values. These transformations of radical Islamic Muslim replacement pursuits apply to many other nations of the free world.

The core teaching of Islam is anti-Christian, anti-Jewish. We know that many Islamic clerics are teaching that Moslems can become martyrs and be assured of going to heaven if they will strap bombs to their bodies and blow themselves up while killing Christians. To be sure, all clerics are not teaching this, but many are teaching it.

Actually, we non-Muslims would be glad to interact freely with Muslims in the West if they could be grateful to what the Jedeo-Christian world has offered them, and if they were capable of blaming themselves

To answer your question about "who is to blame for Islamaphobia", the answer quite simply is you WHYS and all other mass media outlets. If you could go back to just the 1950's, for example. Stop the person on the street and ask them to draw you a picture of what a "Muslim" looked like, what do they thing about "Muslims", and if they know any. In the area of 90% of Americans would have stared at you blindly. Of course Ask them what an Asian or a "Jap" is and what he looks like. They would give you a description of something that would border between humorous and offensive. (Oddly in our heavily German influenced culture, ask those same people about what a German looked like, and equally confusing statements would be forthcoming as they tried to vilify there own race.) Likewise, if you could go back to the turn of the Century and ask what an "Indian" looked like, similar and humor/ offensive driven comments would be offered.

The big difference is today, we have a way to visually "confirm" peoples fears and anxieties about race. Some lunatics with butter knives took over some planes and and crashed them into some buildings with indescribable affect that nobody could have foreseen. But these images and rhetoric were played across mass media whipping the natives into restlessness. Day in and day out, not allowing our collective psyche to repress this awful event. Making those who would seek civility and forgiveness seen as weak and unsupportive of the "clan". The rest was can argue about.

Until the day comes that mass media makes money hand over fist selling images of puppy dogs and children licking lollipops, they will play a role in promoting fear and hatred in the collective.

This is a pointer to the fact that globalization is just a figment of imagination - most people would prefer to market their own women if it comes to that. Many still want to continue living in their own caves - ask Francis Bacon - he should know - very few want to come out and say - "Oh, its just a lot of snow out there - nothing like that in Medina" or "a lot of sand out there and nothing much like this in Cheshire". These two caves are dominated by fear and suspicion - "ho! How come your wife does not have a face like mine?" NO! Everyone is hiding a Jew and his opponent is reading 'Jew' in every western thing.
Its fairly easy game to finish this thing but experience tells us that you get no answer by cutting the branches and leaving the roots. New shoots will still come out - its the high time we should be courageous enough to to face reality.

Its also fascinating to observe what happens in the lull of hostilities - what we see in people is not a clear thinking but minds beset with ambivalence. Nearly every Muslim child would want to go and live in the west or 'hell' if you like - build mosques in hell?

On the other hand nearly every western young missionaries want to go and risk life and limb in Muslim world in order to help people in 'hell' - build churches in hell? - where is confusion coming from?

These two societies are pleading for the world to have bridge makers - the gap has been wide enough for a long time and there is nothing interesting about it. Despite the acrimony they still continue to co-exist.

I understand Baroness Warsi's concern, and I think it is right that she brings it up in the public forum of debate. When people in a social gathering can demean a group without fear of argument or the interest to discuss both sides of an issue, the climate bespeaks a hardening of public opinion and bodes ill for "growing together." While many Muslim communities' reticence and defensiveness bear part of the blame for the growing impasse between cultures, most of the fault lies with the majority populations in multi-ethnic countries. Initially, we let the terrorists define the battle lines, Muslim vs. the rest of the world, rather than defining those lines ourselves, the bad guys vs. the rest of the world.

Stereotypes are the tool of dictators not democrats. We democrats, who are more and more seduced by the simplicity of stereotypes in our normal discussion, cross the line of enlightenment and warm the hearts of the bad guys, who know they have implanted rampant prejudice in otherwise free-thinking people. If Baroness Warsi had not defined the elephant in the room, we would miss the opportunity to look stereotyping in the eye and see it for what it is - a tool of hatred that erects walls between majorities and minorities, and then eats away at the democracy itself.

"Who's to blame for Islamaphobia?"

May I reveal my knee-jerk response? Why, Moslems, of course. The more extreme ones that have a habit of being in the news, for less than enviable reasons, and which the more moderate ones hardly ever complain about openly.

When one sees people who work hard to portray a particular image, an image foreign to the culture they live in, and this applies to any group you care to name, it becomes difficult to consider them purely as "victims."

From all this fiasco, it appears to me that humans are never religious in nature as they posit. They get into religion with a set agenda.

People are neither east nor west. They become so to fulfill an agenda.

In the so called west - in most countries, people are born into political parties that they don't usually crisscross - they are born into an agenda.
To you all Muslims/Westerners - Whose agenda are you since it does appear that you are not there by voluntary choice but rather than through a clever goading done by a hidden pool player? Are you really standing with your own legs?

Who's to blame for Islamaphobia?

YE.
Perhaps KAN and ABLE the two nutty one.

bjay

It seems to me that citizens of multi-ethnic countries need to reflect on what it means to "be a good citizen of our nation." Is it simply paying taxes? Is it speaking the national language? Is it dressing the same? Is it being the same religion? This is not just a question for government, but rather the basic, intrinsic question that the majority must agree on. If one reflects without the emotion of the moment, Muslims living in our countries before 9/11 did their thing while we did ours (according to whatever group we belonged to.) After 9/11 however, Muslims found themselves under a microscope: their differences from everyone else being magnified, and their membership in our communities being minimalized. In such a climate, I would be sensitive and defensive were I Muslim.

In retrospect after 9/11, Muslim communities would likely do things differently in regard to outreach to "others" in their countries, but in retrospect, the "others," if they were honest, would also do things differently in terms of their paranoia and misguided language. We are now well-past the initial emotionalism of attack and defensiveness. We are potentially rational creatures, who, no matter our creed, believe in "treat others like you want to be treated." We need to seize the moment, step back, and start again - between Muslims and non, between majorities and all minorities in the society, between reasoned discourse meant to breed understanding and emotional innuendo meant to set one group against another. And we must do this with the clear agreement of what it means to be a good citizen of our country, because only then do we have a level playing field in which every citizen can take confidence that what he is saying and hearing are communicated in the "same language."

It is not islamophobia, but rather a backlash against a part of a community, which is trying to imposse their laws and morality upon the country they have chosen to immigrate to and live in. I am an atheists living in a free society, and as a consequence have the right to mock religions, draw cartoons of whatever/whomever I feel like drawing, can run advertisment campaings with dogs, etc. There is simply no excuse to attack people, burn down churches, accept suicid bombers etc as a response to feeling offended. I feel ofended by the demands of a sharia courts, but I am not going to burn down a mosque or beat up muslims. i voice my grievience about the idea of such courts and that is a civilized response to a grievience.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I do not think it has become acceptable but it is very hard to get to know people who are not open, who cover their faces, and who continually go to other peoples countries and try to change them to their way of thinking. If they choose to settle in a different country they should follow the customs of that country just like we are expected to do when just visiting a muslim country.

The prejudice is not against the actual person, it is things like the covering up under which all kinds of weapons could be hidden, things like being allowed time out of work for the five times of praying, all these kinds of things which they ar...e allowed to do and we are not allowed to do and it is our country. The sooner the government understands this the sooner the prejudice might go. Of course there is also the fact that it is muslims that are terrorising us and the usa and blowing up themselves and innocent people. The government are stupid and should stop pandering to minorities and look after it's own people.

in a democracy, one should be prepared to discuss important topics of the day with the view to create inter-racial harmony. It is imperative that all sides learn the importance of respect and tolerance. On the one hand it is unfair to cast all Muslims in one mould: just like in other faiths there are lovely exemplary moderates who want to live in peace and harmony with others. The message should be to build a plural society based on mutual respect. With globalisation the world is becoming so interestingly interconnected. Instead of concentrating on differences, one should be looking for ways to build constructively! By harnessing positive traits and skills, the true potential of human beings can be explored to make the world a better place free from discrimination.

What is a "moderate? What is an "extremist"? What is a "radical Islamic Muslim"?

The core teaching of Islam is Christianity, is Judaism, is Hinduism etc. All religions have the same core teaching which is to establish a strong connection with the creator through acts of worship which includes spiritual reflection as well as through treating all other creation with kindness, compassion and a soft heart.

Part of the problem we are seeing today is not religious, it is political. Western powers have attacked Islamic nations, killed Muslims, undermined their governments, supported occupations and dictatorships for decades and are now dealing with a lot of angry Muslims as a result. Western leaders and their media refuse to admit any wrongdoing in their foreign policy and instead try to legitimise the continuing destruction of Muslim life, and attempt to blame the hatred and anger on an inherent flaw in Muslims ... whether it be the religion itself or even the genetics!! The media and politicians then simplify all Muslim anger and actions to this explanation.
A starting point for tackling British Islamophobia is to have an honest assessment on foreign policy towards the Muslim world and its impact on perception towards Muslims and Muslim perception of the West.

Who's to blame for Islamaphobia?

YE.
Perhaps KAN and ABLE the two nutty one.
History like a Swiss-Cheez, don't you think?

/'either the memory of the past bliss is
the anguish of today'/

bjay

@ Bert. There are billions of "Moslems" a day, living their lives peacefully, earnestly, and in no real notable difference then you. Do you see them on the TV, Internet, News outlets? No, you just see the few Muslims that exemplify the "squeaky wheels". Likewise, If I was to stop an Afghanistan goat herder and ask "tell me what you know about Bert." they wouldn't know anything. All he would know of westerners was that they invaded his country for reasons his "media outlet" has questioned, and recognizing more with the faces of the extremists. "These people look like me. I see men of the west walking streets of my homeland with guns and driving tanks. They killed my friend's brother's whole family in an air strike they say was an accident. Why are they here? The guy they want is in Pakistan."

See all we know is biased, one sided, removed, inhuman descriptions of each other. And there is a lot of money to be made in maintaining that environment.

15. At 3:38pm on 21 Jan 2011, Ibrahim in UK wrote:
"People are instinctively afraid of anything and anyone new that they don't understand. There is a growing conservatism in the world that doesn't want change and feels insecure in the company of foreign cultures;"

That really depends on what the "foreign culture" is like (or is perceived to be like). Islam doesn't have a good reputation, that is partially because of representation in the media (when people start suggesting a connection between robberies and Islam that is of course nothing more than good old instigation of the sort that was so pervasive in the 1930's) but also partly because it really is a system that is completely opposite to secular Western society in so many ways. When people see an orthodox Muslim they don't automatically see a violent terrorist but they do see someone who would vote for sharia law. The fact that many ordinary Muslims will not distantiate themselves from the zealots but rather change the subject to Jewish/neocon conspiracies or the crusades reinforces the idea (which could be wrong, but it gets hard to tell) that they really wouldn't do anything to stop the zealots from imposing sharia law if push came to shove so it becomes hard to respect Muslims and the true moderates (how few or how many of them there may be) will suffer as a result of that.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Islam is responsible for Islamaphobia! It's a religion that scares the rest of the world.

It scares the world when a driver kills his employer over religion and is praised!

It scares the world when men and women in love are stoned to death.

It scares the world when a person loses their hand because someone says they stole food with no proof.

It scares the world when a father kills his daughter because she is to westernized.

It scares the world when a persons life has no meaning and is thrown away for nothing.

It scares the world when the word of a radical religious leader can instigate a Jihad contradictory to the teachings he believes in.

So take resp[responsibility Islam, if your going to scare the world deal with the consequences or deal with what causes the problem.

Don't blame the world for what you have caused!

I'm curious, but whose business is it what people say at their own dinner tables? Are we going to get so politically correct that we can dictate what can and cannot be said in the privacy of people's own homes? Unless they are planning a terrorist attack around a dinner table, it's nobody's business.

Not all religions have the same "spiritual core"!!!

Its my impression that far too many Muslims are bigoted towards non-Muslims. To get respect you've got to be prepared to give it. Islam is quite different from most western ways of life, but most Muslims insist on judging western lifestyles from a purely Islamic perspective.

I'd like to ask the Baroness if I was a fly on the wall at Muslim dinner tables (and could understand their language), what would I hear about my culture?

BTW, if I see a veiled Muslim woman I assume not that she's oppressed, but rather that she assumes that I'd sexually molest her or worse if she didn't completely drape her shape. Needless to say, this is completely false. Further, I value the many purely platonic friendships with females I've had over the years that I could not have had if avoidance of sexuality had defined our relationships.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

The speaker says "there are no Muslim leaders".
I think this is very demeaning to Islam, it means that it is disorganised.
It makes no sense when they can organise a "majlis ulama" or a council of Muslim clerics to pronounce fatwas.

Re: Who's to blame for Islamaphobia

Muslims. I personally have no problem with the muslim faith as long as it is not being forced onto me. This is a legitimate fear as someone who has no desire to covert. A common tactic seems to be that when muslims encounter a situation that does not sit well with them they cry discrimination and they seek to change it to conform to their beliefs.

Islam was, is and always will be the enemy of Western civilization. It is an extension of the conflict between West and East dating back to the Greeks and Romans and actually pre-dates both Christianity and Islam. So-called "Islamophobia" is nothing of the sort. It is not FEAR of Islam, but rather recognition that Islam is an existensial threat to our way of life. Europe needs to look at the end of secularism and rise of Islamism in Turkey and beware, or that will be your fate as well.

She is a Conservative and is complaining about Islamaphobia? Tell her to look in the mirror.

Conservatism is the politics of hatred and divisiveness and they decided that Muslims are to be their target. They need someone to use as a fear-mongering target in order to keep their base in line and easily manipulated. Just look at how they have demonized Muslims, how they generalize that all Muslims are terrorists, and all of the slanders and libels about the religion of Islam.

"Methinks she doth complain too much." To paraphrase a quote from old Willy S.

Alan in AZ's post is excellent. I agree with it.

Who is to blame for Islamphoebia?, the religious fanatics, the Muslim Clerics who preach violence in the mosques, Bin Laden who rejoices on innocent people who died from his past attacks, and generally muslims indocrinated that it is right to kill infidels. Baroness Warsi statement it is the last socially acceptable form of bigotry. Then why is it that muslims kill other muslims, and many subjugate their wifes harshley. Well the Baroness is now living in England, so she is well protected by British Law and can feel at ease.

Ibrahim, concerning: "Part of the problem we are seeing today is not religious, it is political. Western powers have attacked Islamic nations, killed Muslims, undermined their governments, supported occupations and dictatorships for decades and are now dealing with a lot of angry Muslims as a result."

Surely, this isn't the reason for Islamophobia. Surely, when westerners see men idly standing by as someone flogs a woman in the street, or no revolt against the clergy when suicide bombers explode in each others mosques or in marketplaces, or men cheering in the streets when one of their politicians is assassinated for being too liberal, surely you don't think this has anything to do with the West? Maybe the threat on people's lives resulting from cartoon images of the Prophet can be attributed to something inflammatory from the West, but even that can't be condoned.

So bottom line, you can understand that no one in the West would want to import such customs and practices? Hence, islamophobia.

The term "Islamophobia" is a politically manipulative coinage designed to silence critics of Islamic intolerance towards unbelievers. In an effort to silence critics advocates needed to come up with terminology that would enable them to portray themselves as victims. If any self-proclaimed moderate Muslim really wants to cure "Islamophobia," here is an easy way. They can: 1. Focus their indignation on Muslims committing violent acts in the name of Islam, not on non-Muslims reporting on those acts.
2. Renounce definitively, sincerely, honestly, and in deeds, not just in comforting words, not just "terrorism," but any intention to replace the U.S. Constitution (or the constitutions of any non-Muslim state) with Sharia even by peaceful means. In line with this, clarify what is meant by their condemnations of the killing of innocent people by stating unequivocally that American and Israeli civilians are innocent people, teaching accordingly in mosques and Islamic schools, and behaving in accord with these new teachings.
3. Teach, again sincerely and honestly, in transparent ways in mosques and Islamic schools, the imperative of Muslims coexisting peacefully as equals with non-Muslims on an indefinite basis, and act accordingly.
4. Begin comprehensive international programs in mosques all over the world to teach sincerely against the ideas of violent jihad and Islamic supremacist attitudes
5. Actively and honestly work with Western law enforcement officials to identify and apprehend jihadists within Western Muslim communities.

Is the principal danger to European society "Islamophobia" or radical Islamism? If it is "Islamophobia" then it is possible to rationalize a policy ignoring the roots of terrorist attacks and radical forces in the Muslim community while tending to appease demands for more power, funding, and privileges. Otherwise, it is claimed, Muslims will be tortured, murdered, expelled, and mistreated. Yet if the main threat is revolutionary Islamism, which I think it is, it will bring the collapse of national identity, stability, and democracy, then Europe is in a lot of trouble.

Baroness Warsi has a very valid point. It would appear that words like militant, fundamentalist, radical are often used when describing Moslems or Islam yet when describing Jews or Christians, for instance, terminology like Orthodox or Ultra-orthodox are used. In Britain during the sectarian troubles in Northern Ireland with Protestant pitted against Catholic with many of deaths resulting from the action of 'Christian terrorists' not even Norman Tebbit used such emotive terminology to describe the perpetrators of the atrocities, not even when his own wife was so grievously injured in the Brighton bombing.

2 points after istening to the show.

First, I am confused when people quote the Quran saying that it calls for hatred of all those that are not Muslim. However, the bible calls for the damnation of all those that lie, steal, commit adultery, take the lord's name in vain, turn their back on the poor, or work on Sunday. Heck, according to the Old Testament, these people should be "stoned to death" according to mosses' law. (Since Jews don't believe in the New Testament, they still prescribe to those mandates.) Nobody who points out the Quran’s definitions of sins point out the bible’s as well.

Second, let us work this prejudice thing from the ground up. Let us say that there is a young boy who is told that his daddy is going off to war on and off for 4 years. This boy grows up hearing terms like "rag heads", "camel jockeys" and "sand midges". These same kids grew up with visions of these images of "terrorist" associated to 9/11 that their daddy was fighting, being played across the TV. This is the only thing they know of Muslims. What do you think this little boy turned teenager is going to believe about Muslims, Islam, anybody from the Middle East? What information does this mind have besides that which comes from his dad and family AND the Mass media? Made worse “daddy” and family that are paid by the government for doing this “job” of “keeping America safe” are dependant on this mentality. AND, listening to daddy call “those liberal supporters of the terrorist” names like unpatriotic and traders. This little kid has no choice but to believe in these boogie men. Now, here in the US, what people like FOX, Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and all the pigs with lipstick found out is that there is money and power in crafting media that goes out of its way to confirm this misguided beliefs. Tell them what they want to hear, whip up that frenzy, and people will turn you into a marketable product.

Referance to Islamaphobia topic of Saturday22/01/2011

I born in Sudan and I came to Australia in 2005, I've attend schools with Muslim students untill yr12. I learned that the establishment of Islam was violence even the word Islam means 'to surrender to your enemy'. The Muslim world have a dream of being superpower worldwide. In Sudan the Muslim people have statements calling the non-muslims 'Christians and others' Kopaars in Arabic that are rejecters of Allah (God) and if you kill non-muslim you serving Allah and violents is a part of preaching the Qurraan or Islam. The Muslims now are denying the tererrist acts that are not the ones but the reality is that the Muslims are implementing strategic using violents to weaken the other powers and at end when they become powerful over the world they will force non-muslims to Islam by sword.

I recently attended a dinner party where another guest said something that was clearly Islamaphobic. I was incensed and challenged him, needless to say silence descended on the proceedings. I was angry for two reasons, one for what he said and two because he appeared to be comfortable in saying what he said because he was in the company of white Europeans who he apparently believed would share his bigoted opinions.
I do now wonder at the other guests silence, did they indeed share his views, I do hope not. If they did not then I am saddened that they could not summon up the courage to speak out. Silence is the bigots friend.

Good Luck to the Baroness for her new Government post. No mean-feat for a Muslim woman and I suspect her work will be hard trying to convince her own menfolk of anything... Who's to blame for Islamaphobia?
Well, apart from the confusion of 'Gods'? (The Koran insists both the Christian 'God' of Abraham and 'Allah' are the same deity) yet some Muslims would have you believe otherwise? -Apart from the Crusades/ Muhammad/the Jews /all the eco-political-racial claptrap in the middle east over the last 2 millenia; -Apart from all the Afghan wars (all 30 of them? the first by Alexandra in 330 BCE? and the last in 2001?) -Apart from the uprising of the Taliban -which I imagine was Osama Bin Ladens fault, because he offerd his mercenary army to aid the US, was snubbed, and subsequently rampaged across the World in revenge..

- After all that, I would say the blame lay squarely at the feet of the moderate, everyday peaceful Islamic peoples of the World. They flee to freedom yet bring their junk with them and do nothing - NOTHING! Not one single finger is lifted to change their world and instead, leave it for everyone else IN the World, to clean it up after them.. By this single act of non-action, they associate themselves with the terrorist- of-the-day by agreeing/ approving/ and allowing all their K rap to drop on everyone else. This may not be true, but without any redress it darn well appears that way! I think this is why the World views them with deep mistrust, hatred and suspicion. And they really cant blame the World for this if they themselves are creating this image! What they need to do is wake up, shape up, get off the fence and pick a side...

Who's to blame for Islamaphobia?
At least Baroness Warsi has the guts to broach this subject and bring it to the forefront.
And who said that Muslims are terrorists ? George Bush and his media
Who said it was someone named Osama Ben Laden who was responsible for 9/11? George Bush and his media team
Just ask yourself ....if you have the guts ..........Would Mr Obama have been elected by the people of the great US of A, if he was a Muslim.
There.......your honest answer would definitely show you how prejudiced they really are !!!!
If people really want to talk about Islam and put it down .......because of their ignorance they feel threatened by Islam..........first read about it and then make own opinions known.
Believe me, you won't have any ......... not negative ones !

Thanks

@modernJan (#39),

I completely agree. There are many peices to the puzzle, and one of them is the perception that Islamic societies give off. Most Islamic societies in Europe originate from poor conservative immigrant backgrounds (early European immigration policies invited and encouraged low-cost immigrant labour). They adapt slower than the more liberal Europeans. It wasn't a major issue in the earlier days, but today it is becoming more of an issue, and Europe now wants to change the rules of the game and put new conditions and consequences on Muslim citizens and immigrants.
I think, that while there is a genuine debate to be had about immigration from foreign conservative muslim cultures into a new liberal host, the debate has been ignored for too long. This was taken advantage of by the far right who have led the debate from a different agenda: maintaining racial or national purity/identity through rejection of foreigners. As Europe moves to the right, these proposals are more attractive and embraced. I think for Europe to succeed, the European Left also have to come up with a realistic solution on immigration. Muslim societies also need to recognise the debate and engage in it actively and positively both within the Muslim communities and at the national level.

@ Bert,

You touch on something that we in the West really need to get through our thick skulls. We are the “drama queens” of the world. Flogging women, assassination, in their streets is part of their culture. It's their land, their country, and their right to act as they want. Mind our own business. Just because they have oil under their land doesn't give us the right to go supply their enemies with technology to brutalize them.

While you look upon them in disgust, they look upon the west and see unwed pregnant teenage mother, domestic abuse, politicians that lie to get elected, divorce, gluttony, thievery, infidelity, greed, and irresponsibility as if it were an abomination. They can not understand why a person would risk their mortal lives over eternal damnation.

These guns and technology that allowed one tribe to conquer and bring the “freedom of capitalism” to the lands of another tribe were supplied by the west (and the east). Do you honestly think a tribal leader sees men dressed in western uniforms, carrying western weapons, and protecting an oil well on lands that once belonged to his tribe and not think that leader doesn’t put blame on the west?

Dwight says, "It's their land, their country, and their right to act as they want. Mind our own business."

Sorry, but in your haste to proclaim your political correctness, you missed the most important point I was making. Which was, the West does not feel compelled to import those barbaric customs in its own culture. Hence, islamophobia. Which means, do not force those customs on us, thank you very much. Do not come here expecting to continue these practices here.

If you think I was trying to justify our wrongheaded invasion of Iraq, or our hopeless attempt at turning Afghanistan into a nation building project, you would be seriously mistaken. In fact I've said more than once on this blog, if Iraqis preferred to be ruled by Saddam Hussein, it was certainly within their rights. I'm absolutely opposed to the notion that we should show anyone else how wonderful we are, by force. I'm totally against sacrificing US and allied lives on these adventures. But do not make the mistake of concluding that my being against these boneheaded projects means I respect, or cherish, or long for, Islamist ways.

Who is to blame? The Muslims themselves. And I refuse to be PC over this.

I agree with GTRS!As the great nation we are with all religions living under one roof so to speak ,why is it we always have these discussions about muslims ? We never hear Sikhs , Hindus , Buddists , Jews or any other religion waffling on about how Britain is ill treating them! No !!!! It makes my blood boil.

61. At 07:35am on 24 Jan 2011, Mariam-Joyce DSouza wrote

strange that we still have daily suicide and other bombings, now that Bush is not any longer in power. islam has only itself to blame for the reaction it is getting. for decades the west tried to be understanding, but the barrel of understanding is full and overflowing. it is up to the muslims to bring their own house in order or suffer the backlash and consequences, because Europe is raising against the creeping islamiztion of its continent.

oh whats she complaining about as soon as she gets her first million in office she will be off like a shot to sunbath in the Bahamas there all the same glory hunters with false promises.

Who's to blame for Islamaphobia?

Right wing conservatives.

69. At 10:42pm on 31 Jan 2011, sick and tired of arrogant americans wrote:
Who's to blame for Islamaphobia?

Right wing conservatives.
------------------------
And Jack Straw.

65. At 9:35pm on 24 Jan 2011, GTR5 wrote:
Who is to blame? The Muslims themselves. And I refuse to be PC over this.
------------------------------
I refuse to be PC, this comment is clearly bonkers!

The people of Islam are to blame. They subscribe to a religion that is outdated (14th century), does not tolerate other religions, they refuse to integrate into British society and create their own parliaments and councils, they over react to cartoons, and is the only religion that has fanatics willing to commit suicide to kill others to get their way. The list goes on.

(My comment is based on Islam in Britain)

Islam as a faith is just like any other, it is a way of practicising your faith in god, I use the singular as all gods are one.

The Islamophobia issue is with the minority who corrupt the impressionable and enforce fear of religious retribution, we have seen this in other religions that have a common root in the Middle East.

The problem with the wider Muslim Community is that they are not vocal enough in denouncing the fanatics, they do not condemn the bombings, beatings, stonings, imprisonments and honour killings within their community even if they live in the West.

Are the Imams so powerful to the point of dictaorship that even in a free society they cannot speak out?

It is interesting to note that Asian religions generally are all peaceful and accepting of others.

I admire anyone who has faith in the light, I shall call it, and that it makes them and those around them a better person without the threat of fear.

The Islamic people spread a rich culture across most of southern europe during its heyday as did indian culture spread itself in a different way and now we all enjoy different foods restaurants and dress styles etc.

This mix of influences is good because it is accepted by all but a forced ideology will always meet with resistance.

The Islamic faith needs to open its arms to the wider world and accept that it must adapt or be forever seen as infringing modern societies cultural standards.

The statement above is true for all religions where control is enforced, christianity has mostly grown out of this but there are still fundamentalists who cause harm and it is up to society to push them back.

The muslim people have fractional problems as do all societies, India has cast or sect predjudices as do the UK with division of Christians as Catholic, Protestant, Anglican and acceptance of male or female respresentatives.

Each society should deal with these problems, accept that the path that they follow is not one that can be enforced on another.

Islam is not wrong, extremism and the non-denouncment of atrocities by the people of that faith is totally wrong.

If Islam wants a better face to present it must start to give up extremists as all people should do even the the UK.

I don't believe Ovais in London, who claims to read news headlines saying "a Muslim man beat up his wife". Sorry, it doesn't happen.